Well, I understand better then. Excuse me. But I would respond by saying that just because a school utilizes kata that its a McDojo per se. I actually have a good deal of respect for TMA. I simply see room for improvement. Isnt interaction and exchange the purpose of this place? Its easy to point at others but how about ourselves? I could easily be writting this thread about the flaws of MMA training. kata just wouldnt have been on the list.

As for spending time partying, thats not me. And the family life, I wish I had more time for. Are you not a family man?

So I once again propose the question" How does a martial artist, or anyone for that matter, excel in their trade, or improve the trade itself, without first questioning the very thing they partake in ?

_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be." Lao Tzu

As for assumptions, my training assumes that the shortest, most direct attack is the best way to go and my assumptions for my training would HAVE to be that it will work for me, otherwise why would I bother in the first place right? So what about yours?

_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be." Lao Tzu

and my assumptions for my training would HAVE to be that it will work for me, otherwise why would I bother in the first place right? So what about yours?

Fine what happens if the technique that works best for you is your opponents favourite move to use a counter against? and you donít have the right technique to use on your opponent? To many variables. Sounds like some JKD teachings that I have read about.

Swiftly moving on from my last posting, when the said technique is finaly trained so it can be used then performing the Kata daily will keep the technique in a persons mind. Add to that one technique the other techniques available in kata then performing kata daily gives a way of keeping all the techniques available for use

So what myth are you destroying?

Just a small point about the Heians is that on grading to 2nd Dan or 3rd Dan a black belt in some karate organisations has to show they can still do them with more advanced technique applications etc

I assume that kata was created with the intention of ending confrontation as soon as possible. originally for killing on a battlefield(as last resort if the soldier/guard had no weapons of course), the kata was gradually and slightly adapted over time towards civil self-protection. (*see added part below for slightly off-topic point.)

My goal is not self-defense or killing on a battlefield. If those were my goals, I think specialized modern military training and modern police training are better ways to accomplish them in this day and age. my goal is learning what kata has within my Art of choice.

why is it my Art of choice? I grew up with it and it suits me.

if it bothers people that my assumptions and goals are self-referencing...oh well. do what you enjoy, and try not to call it something that it's not.

*off-topic point - I beleive these things based on what I see and read. I have a faily good sense of whats bunk and historic spin, and my assumptions are indeed biased but not unfounded. kata could very well be contained principles after the fact - meaning someone appropriately skilled and imaginitive constructed them - not necessarily as a training device for military...but rather as a teaching device for instructors. over time, the needs of the students change - and so did the emphasis of what was taught. The notion of 'secrets' and only teaching those who displayed personal responsibility makes sense in the same way we try to keep criminals from having guns. Why would anyone want to teach the principles of how to destroy another person to a general population? ..and especially on a small island muchless the world. better to show them the abstract form for health benefit and adding a rhetoric for making better people. strip away all of the cusion, and it's clear raw kata is not intended for negotiated peace-making or inner-reflection. just my current view anyway.

Ok, if you're talking point sparring without contact, I'd agree with you. However, if you're talking point sparring with the potential for KO, I disagree. You could look at the UFC today as point sparring with the potential for win by KO, because the winners of matches can be determined by the performance of the fighters (in its beginnings it couldn't be called point sparring, because wins were only determined by submission). Hence, as long as there is contact and KO potential, sparring has value in its own right.

I don't undervalue kata. As I said:

Quote:I believe that these kinds of training have separate goals and are less related than most people think. Bagwork builds muscular strength and develops full punching force against a resisting surface. Partner drills develop response times and accuracy. Sparring develops technical application, strategy and timing. Kata develops spatial awareness, technical control and automated response.

Kata is good for what it teaches. It teaches many elements of fighting and is a good tool to learn with.

The problem arises when people pretend that it teaches things that it doesn't. What it doesn't teach you is how to fight against an intelligent or "unpredictable" human being. You can imagine as much as you want what a human opponent would do in your kata but you'll probably be surprised by human ingenuity when you encounter it. Sparring trains you to deal with human ingenuity, which I believe is one of the major deciding factors in a fight. When your opponent does the unexpected, your kata training will not help you.

I believe there's a famous quote "everybody's got plans... until they get hit".

Furthermore, you probably don't get hit hard when doing kata, which means that you're not prepared for such a thing if you only train using kata.